Get Involved

Site Search

May 19, 2014 (GUATEMALA) — Guatemala’s new Attorney General, Thelma Esperanza Aldana Hernández, former President of the Supreme Court, took office Saturday after a selection process fraught with irregularities. The rushed transition has generated severe criticism from national and international observers, and human rights groups have suggested it is part of a coordinated effort to terminate the advances made under her predecessor.

“Outgoing Attorney General, Dr. Claudia Paz y Paz was a symbol of hope and justice for many frustrated with an institution that historically served the interests of the economic, political and military elite,” said Kelsey Alford-Jones, Executive Director of the Guatemala Human Rights Commission/USA.

Under Paz y Paz’s leadership, investigation of cases from Guatemala’s 36-year internal armed conflict, which ended in 1996, began to move forward. Her prosecutions of corrupt former officials, drug lords, high level military officers, and other human rights violators made history in Guatemala, and contributed to an overall reduction in impunity of almost 25% for violent crime.

However, her efforts – particularly to prosecute former head of state Ríos Montt for genocide and war crimes in 2013 — provoked a backlash and she was the target of an aggressive defamation campaign in the press and social media. In February 2014, the Constitutional Court, which had reversed the conviction of Ríos Montt nine months prior, ruled to cut short Paz y Paz’s term by seven months.

National and international groups, including the US Embassy, criticized the ruling as arbitrary and politically motivated. Nonetheless, the nominating process for her replacement moved forward despite concerns about serious irregularities, including a lack of transparency around how the candidates would be evaluated and an alleged threat against one of the members of the Nominating Commission. A conversation leaked to the press suggested an “orchestrated plan” to affect the selection process. The President of the Commission admitted “it was possible” there had been outside intervention in the process.

Paz y Paz was not included in the top six candidates sent by the Commission to the President, despite the fact that the Commission itself had given her the second highest score among the 26 candidates. Of the six finalists, most had little to no experience in the criminal justice system and several been the subject of objections by the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) and other groups.

Claudia Samayoa, Coordinator for UDEFEGUA, said “The decision to exclude Paz y Paz represents a pact of impunity across three major sectors of the country: networks of organized crime, the business sector, and those who wish to avoid being held responsible for human rights violations committed during the internal armed conflict. Obviously, these three sectors are not interested in strengthening the justice system.”

Aldana describes herself as “right wing” and was considered the favorite from early on due to ties to the President’s Patriot Party and evidence she was backed by one of the Party’s powerful political operatives. Statements made by Aldana about Paz y Paz suggest that the new Attorney General will prioritize prosecuting “everyday” crimes such as thefts of cell phones and property rights issues. Her previous work in the Courts on violence against women provides some hope that she will also channel resources into prosecuting those cases.

“Many are concerned that Aldana will not continue Paz y Paz’s legacy of confronting impunity for crimes of the past, particularly given her ties to both the FRG and the Patriot Party, two groups that have vocally opposed prosecutions of members of the military,” said Alford-Jones.

Last week, Guatemala’s Congress passed a resolution denying genocide occurred and criticizing the genocide case for hurting national reconciliation. The decision prompted protests over the weekend, and accusations that the move violated Guatemala’s Peace Accords and threatened judicial independence.

According to Alford-Jones, “The resolution is not legally binding, but is the latest attempt to delegitimize the genocide case and create a de facto amnesty. It also raises concerns that the Congress may be looking to legislate new amnesty provisions.”

In response to the ruling, the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights stated, “The Commission urges the [Guatemalan] State to respect the principle of separation of powers, an essential condition of judicial independence.”